In
almost every dojo, dojang and kwoon across the globe, it is preached
that what the student learns there is only to be used in self-defence
and violence should be avoided. It’s probably the most common mantra
heard in the martial arts and most of us would agree with this
philosophy, but how do you avoid violence in a practical sense? Here, in
the second part of a series by Bushi Dojo’s Drew Guest, we learn about
the different types of aggressors and the best way to deal with them.

Two Types of Aggressors

You’re most likely to face violence from the ‘predatory aggressor’ or
the ‘desperate aggressor’, who is simply at the end of his tether.

The
predatory aggressor uses aggression as a tool to obtain something or to
achieve a goal. The most common of these types of aggressors are the
bullies. These people use aggression to feed their need to exert power
over another. They are usually attempting to fill some aspect of
themselves they are lacking; it may be they lack power themselves. These
are the typical “What you looking at?” thugs. They are masters at
manipulating victims so they can ‘justifiably’ escalate the level of
aggression. Other predatory aggressors use aggression as a tool of
compliance to commit crime. The mugger will often use aggression to
overwhelm the victim and induce fear, as does the rapist, but a rapist
also uses it as a means to exert and feel power over the victim (the
real purpose for the assault).

Warning signs of a predatory aggressor, from Surviving Aggressive People by S T Smith:

Testing rituals

Foot-in-door tactic

Invading personal space and boundaries

Exploiting sympathyand guilt

Intimidation andexploiting fear

Discounting ‘no’ with persistence

Talking too much

Contradiction between words and body language

Other warning/survival signs, from the book The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker, are:

Forced teaming

Loan-sharking

Giving too many details

Making unsolicited promises

Typecasting

The end-of-tether aggressor (also known as the desperate
aggressor), on the other hand, uses aggression as a last resort. They
see no other option and have most likely exhausted numerous other
options in an attempt to solve the problem. They tend to be pessimistic
and don’t want to listen. Due to the highly charged state of emotions,
they will be hypersensitive and hyper-vigilant, and they will have
little concern for consequences. The end of tether aggressor resorts to
the use of aggression in an attempt to regain control. These people
aren’t criminals but simply stressed-out individuals who have come to
the end of their tether. Road rage, for example, is often committed by
normal people who have just snapped. In these cases, the perceived wrong
against them is just the final straw and is usually unrelated to the
true cause of the aggression.

Warning signs of a desperate aggressor, from Surviving Aggressive People by S T Smith:

Whether predatory or desperate, the five don’ts of de-escalation —
Threaten, Argue, Challenge, Order, Shame — or TACOS rules (see Blitz
Vol. 23 No. 8) can always be applied to avoid escalating the situation.
The difference is that with the predatory aggressor, TACOS is used to
counter their attempts to manipulate and escalate, while with
end-of-tether aggressors, we are avoiding accidental or misinterpreted
escalation. When faced with aggression, having familiarity with TACOS
will go a long way towards ensuring your safety, regardless of which
type of aggressor or aggression you face. the different approaches

The aggressive approach:

I personally don’t like this method. Aggression feeds aggression and
it takes a certain kind of person to pull it off. In my experience, the
people who really need self-protection don’t have the required
confidence or inclination to safely use this tactic. It is also the
approach with the least flexibility and the greatest risk. That being
said, it can work for the right person.

The goal with this approach
is to be more aggressive and intimidating than the aggressor. Ultimately
you will attempt to elicit the fight-or-flight response (or an
adrenaline dump) in your aggressor. Hopefully they will interpret this
as fear, thinking they’ve bitten off more then they can chew, and back
down. This approach is essentially a bluff, but with all bluffs you must
be prepared to have it called. The problem is if it doesn’t work, you
will usually have a bigger problem and more aggression aimed at you.

Be
honest with yourself as to whether you can pull off this approach. Do
you have the skills to back it up? If it fails, you most assuredly will
need to use them. The aggressive approach can work, but there is no
going back once you take that path, so choose it wisely. This approach
works best when your opponent only makes a half-hearted or uncommitted
attack.

The assertive approach:

The difference between being assertive and being aggressive is that
when you are being assertive you are standing up for your rights while
respecting other people’s rights. Being aggressive is standing up for
your rights with no regard for the rights of any other person.
Assertiveness is an ideal approach for when you have to stand your
ground. The obvious examples are those involved in the security industry
or law-enforcement, such as door staff, police officers and the like.
However, this approach can also be used by teachers, store managers and
supervisors, bus drivers, government workers — in fact, any position
where you have to follow set policies and procedures or you are in a
position of authority. That being said, it’s an option open to virtually
anyone.

This approach involves remaining calm and in control. You
should use clear and specific language, with complete sentences and
direct statements. Use co-operative, and empathetic language. Try to
avoid ‘you’ statements, as they tend to come across as blaming or
accusing. This often leads to the other person becoming defensive, which
may block a calm rational discussion. Instead try to use ‘I’
statements, as this allows you to own the statement and keeps lines for
communication open. If someone is talking, they are not hitting.

This
should be backed up by appropriate eye contact and body language. Your
posture should be direct, open, relaxed and attentive. Your stance
should be passive and non-violent. You can take full use of the ‘fence’
(hands raised, palms out) and it doesn’t need to be hidden, but be sure
not to make it aggressive. Avoid ‘ums’ and ‘ahs’ and constant
head-nodding. Use minimal and appropriate touch and provide responsive
expressions.

The idea is to project a vibe of confidence and control.
You establish your boundary and you enforce it, but in a polite, calm
manner. Ideally your level of aggression should always be below that of
your opponent. This has two effects: firstly, it gives you room to move
if you do have to raise the level of aggression (it’s always easier to
increase your aggression then it is to lower it); secondly, it has an
anchoring effect on the other person’s level of aggression. The lower
your level of aggression, the lower the other person needs to have his.

The submissive approach:

This approach involves submitting and complying with the demands of
the aggressor to prevent escalation to physical violence. This has good
and bad aspects. On one hand it often prevents physical violence, as you
are giving the attacker what he wants; on the other hand, it does
nothing to deter future attacks and establishes you as an easy target.
It involves giving up your boundaries and your rights. Psychologically,
this approach can be quite dysfunctional; often after the event the
victim will go through a stage of regret and depression. They may see
their action as cowardly, chastising themselves for not fighting back.
This can have quite a detrimental effect on everyday life as the
feelings of inadequacy and the damaged self-esteem affect performance
and relationships across other areas of life (e.g. with family or at
work).

The submissive approach can work — and often does. You have to
decide if being submissive outweighs the consequences of an alternative
action. This approach is best used in street crime such as a mugging,
where the aggressor is after material possessions. I have a saying;
“There is nothing in my wallet that is worth more than holding my wife
again”. I don’t recommend this approach for bullying situations; in
these cases submission only reinforces the bullying behaviour. It may
work for a single-instance bully such as the pub thug, where you allow
the guy to get an ego boost by putting you down; in a sense this is a
type of robbery, where he steals a bit of ego from you to boost his own.

You
have to decide whether this approach is appropriate for the situation,
and that will depend on the situation, circumstances, environment, the
aggressor, yourself and a plethora of other variables. Trust your
instincts. If you feel this is the time to be compliant, then go with
your gut.

You should avoid eye contact and gaze downward, but this
doesn’t mean you take your eyes off the aggressor. Instead, just keep
your gaze below his face — the chest is ideal. You’ll want to project a
sense of fear or at least portray that image. Try to appear to be
shrinking away from the aggressor. Practise this again in front of a
mirror so that it looks genuine.

The passive approach:

The above approaches (submissive and aggressive) are extremes; the
passive approach is a broader and more flexible approach. It acts as a
complement to the other approaches (except for the aggressive approach).
You can be passive and assertive and you can be passive and submissive;
you can even be just passive, but it is a bit contradictory to be both
passive and aggressive at the same time. Once you enter aggression, you
leave passiveness behind.

The key to the passive approach is its
flexibility. Think of passiveness as being the part of a scale anchored
by full assertiveness at one end, and full submissiveness at the other
end. Generally you will start in the middle, which is passive-neutral or
just passive. From this point you can move one way or the other, and
back again, depending on how the situation unfolds.

The passive stance:

The passive stance is also known as the ‘non-threatening’,
‘non-violent’ posture, the ‘de-escalation stance’ and the ‘negotiation
stance’. It is one of the most useful concepts in self-protection.
Essentially, the passive stance involves standing with your hands
raised, palms open and facing your aggressor, so as not to appear like a
fighting guard. Your feet should be neutral or with one slightly
forward of the other, in a position that will offer you balance and
manoeuvrability but not look like you’re ‘ready to go’.

It is
important not to think of the passive stance as a fixed stance. It
should be adapted to suit your purpose; subtle changes can change it
from neutral to more assertive or more submissive. The stance forms a
part of your body language and should come across as natural. It
provides a platform to negotiate from, while simultaneously providing an
efficient base to reflexively respond to a sudden attack, or from which
to launch your own pre-emptive strike. It naturally incorporates the
‘fence’ concept developed by Geoff Thompson, and provides a physical and
psychological barrier between you and the aggressor. This barrier also
acts as a distance-maker and measurer. The stance tends to have a
calming affect on the aggressor. Even if it has little effect, it won’t
contribute to escalation — and that means we’re still a step closer to
our goal of de-escalation.

Site Under Construction

Slowly but surely I've implemented changes to the site's look and functionality. I'm sure you have noticed the changes.Ecstatic that I've finally been able to successfully update my site closer more in line with my vision of it.

Not sure if it will be the final look of the site or not, but the Sojourn of Septillion Steps with respect to the site's look has already taken quite a few steps beyond the first!

I will still be endeavoring to put up information I think will benefit your martial arts training as well as your self-defense. I sincerely thank you for visiting/reading!